ATEG Archives

January 2012

ATEG@LISTSERV.MIAMIOH.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Teresa Lintner <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 6 Jan 2012 09:37:41 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (1 lines)
Hi Herb,



I am always so impressed by the depth of your knowledge and passion that

you show for your work. The workshop you describe sounds absolutely

wonderful. I only wish you had the notes.



Best,



Terre





Teresa Lintner

Senior Development Editor

Cambridge University Press

32 Avenue of the Americas

New York, New York 10013-2473

Telephone: 212 337-5070

Fax: 212 645-5960

Email: [log in to unmask]







From:	"Stahlke, Herbert" <[log in to unmask]>

To:	[log in to unmask]

Date:	01/06/2012 12:49 AM

Subject:	Re: Spoken vs. formal written English

Sent by:	Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar

            <[log in to unmask]>







When I used the term “grammar in context” earlier in this context, I was

intentionally using it in a broader sense that it typically has in the

literature.  A number of years ago I did a summer workshop for writing

teachers in which we chose constructions and grammatical categories on the

basis of discourse needs.  So we dealt with constructions that change focus

and topic, ways of foregrounding and backgrounding, etc.  That led us to

talking about phrases, clauses, parts of speech, grammatical relations,

etc. always in the context of effective expression.  Unfortunately, I no

longer have the notes or papers from that class, but I remember iis fondly.

The students, all secondary and middle writing teachers, were a very

thoughtful bunch.  Of course, Martha Kolln’s work is deservedly respected

for its pioneering of this sort of approach.



In my grammar classes, I’ve frequently used poems as objects of analysis.

One of my favorites, and one of the most challenging, is Sir Philip

Sidney’s sonnet “With how sad steps.”



With how sad steps, O Moon, thou climb’st the skies,

How silently, and with how wan a face!

What!  May it be that even in heav’nly place

That busy archer his sharp arrows tries?

Sure, if that long-with-love-acquainted eyes                  5

Can judge of love, thou feel’st a lover’s case.

I read it in thy looks, thy languisht grace

To me, that feel the like, thy state descries.



Then, ev’n of fellowship, O Moon, tell me,

Is constant love deem’d there but want of wit?              10

Are beauties there as proud as here they be?

Do they above love to be lov’d, and yet

Those lovers scorn whom that love doth possess?

Do they call virtue there ungratefulness?



Sidney is, of course, mid-sixteenth c., which means Early Modern English,

and that makes his language a bit of a challenge for students.  As an

exercise, try grammatically analyzing the four sentences found in the last

six lines.



On an old chestnut of a topic, the poem also illustrates some interesting

historical phenomena in the uses of “that.”



Line 3:  “that” is a subordinating conjunction

Line 5:  “that” is an EME use of that to mark “if” as a subordinating

construction.

Line 8:  “that” introduces a nonrestrictive relative clause, something

grammars generally tell us is wrong.

Line 13:  “that” functions as in line 5, supporting “whom” as a

subordinator.



But that’s another topic.



Herb

From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [

mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John Chorazy

Sent: Friday, January 06, 2012 12:15 AM

To: [log in to unmask]

Subject: Re: Spoken vs. formal written English



Hello...



I'm understanding that the "grammar in context" model means finding

grammatical functions and processes that just happen to happen in a given

piece of prose, academic or otherwise. But then what? We take out a

sentence, a clause, a phrase, whatever and analyze it for its grammar (what

other choice would we have, anyway, since we're bound to a few words at a

time when reading that way?). If "context" simply means the plot, focus,

theme, purpose, or audience of a text, then analyzing how grammar works

specifically to that context is really more about analyzing rhetorical

strategies (looking at bits of language for what they do to the larger

whole and thus to the reader/listener). Looking sentence level for things

like adjectives etc is looking at grammar isolated - and I'm not saying

that's a bad thing. We study prepositional phrases first and then read

Hemingway - and it clicks. Maybe I haven't seen a successful "context"

model for the High School level... and to get back to the SAT and other

high stakes tests, the grammar error identification questions look at

single sentences without larger rhetorical/narrative context. We'd like to

be able to approach many goals; carrying sound reading comprehension

strategies that consider both grammar and rhetoric and also being able to

pass a very cold state, board, or agency test is often a funky marriage for

the average student.



Teresa - we use Prentice Hall Literature anthologies for which Kate

Kinsella happens to be a contributing author. I was fascinated by the

"Academic English Second Language" assertion, as we've had this

conversation among faculty dozens of times. Yet teachers simply go ahead

and assign x number of pages to read and still wonder why students (who

actually do pass their eyes over letters and words) come back and fail

reading check quizzes. I'd like to know more about her comments and

suggestions, especially since she writes for textbooks...



Thank you...



John













On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 1:49 PM, Dixon, Jack <[log in to unmask]>

wrote:

Terre and Herb,



Herb raises some excellent questions for us to consider as we think through

how we teach grammar -- all the language arts, actually.  I think his idea

about "a much more thorough-going grammar in context model" is very

important.  I certainly agree with the idea of teaching grammar in context,

but I have also observed that often "grammar in context" means not teaching

much grammar (or language development) at all.  Herb's idea of a more

carefully thought through scope and sequence would be very helpful --

though I recognize all the problems confronting anyone willing to take on

this onerous task.  We've discussed this issue numerous times in one way or

another on this site.



Terre's integrated approach to teaching reading, vocabulary, writing, and

grammar makes much sense.  Finding those readings that students find

relevant can certainly be a problem.  (I've found one on car buying that my

college students enjoy; the author, a former car salesman, discusses how

customers are manipulated because of their ignorance.)



Jack





-----Original Message-----

From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [mailto:

[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Teresa Lintner

Sent: Thursday, January 05, 2012 11:59 AM

To: [log in to unmask]

Subject: Re: Spoken vs. formal written English



Hi Herb,



Textbooks for teaching grammar to English Language Learners in secondary

and higher education are going in the direction of teaching grammar in

context, especially in more academic contexts.  It's much easier to get

students to use adjectives, say, if you start off with an article on

worker's rights and then discuss the article as well as students'

experiences afterwards. Students care about the topic and want to talk

about it. Along the way, they learn the  correct placement of adjectives as

well as great vocabulary and other grammar that happens to crop up within

the  context.  ...this just happens to be the approach taken on the

textbooks series I'm working on.  I'm not endorsing it, for the record.





Best,



Terre



Teresa Lintner

Senior Development Editor

Cambridge University Press

32 Avenue of the Americas

New York, New York 10013-2473

Telephone: 212 337-5070

Fax: 212 645-5960

Email: [log in to unmask]







From:   "STAHLKE, HERBERT F" <[log in to unmask]>

To:     [log in to unmask]

Date:   12/26/2011 02:32 PM

Subject:        Re: Spoken vs. formal written English

Sent by:        Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar

           <[log in to unmask]>







Jack,



You raise important questions or pedagogy and of content, questions we have

discussed at length on this forum without reaching consensus.  Should

grammar be taught as content?  Should it be taught as an adjunct to the

teaching of writing?  What you suggest is that a significant amount of

grammar, grammar that is useful to writers, can be taught in the process of

meeting the needs of developing writers.  And this leads me to wonder

whether a grammar in context approach might not be a way to introduce

grammatical knowledge that we all think is useful and presenting it in a

way that makes its relevance obvious.  This suggests a much more

thorough-going grammar in context model than we usually see in writing

classrooms, rather, an approach that starts in early grades and

incorporates grammar into language arts activities across the board.



Not being a K12 teacher, I may be describing what some teachers are already

doing.



Herb



-----Original Message-----

From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar [

mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Dixon, Jack

Sent: Sunday, December 25, 2011 6:59 AM

To: [log in to unmask]

Subject: Re: Spoken vs. formal written English



Terre:



Thank you for your detailed response.  I do want to check out Kate

Kinsella's work in using academic vocabulary and sentence frames. (Any

titles in particular where I should start?)  I am familiar with "They Say,

I Say" and agree that it can be useful for helping students understand

those deeper cognitive structures that academic writers use - actually used

by more than just academics.



I would like a copy of your rubric if you are willing to share.  Are the

two essays you use pieces that you have collected or written yourself, or

are they published somewhere so that I could access them?



What I like about your strategies for teaching academic vocabulary and

using sentence frames is that you are teaching students how to communicate

without putting the focus on error.  So many objectives that involve

developing language proficiency involve error avoidance or correction.

While correcting errors is important, teaching students how to accomplish

larger rhetorical goals seems more productive to me.  In my classes over

the last few years (developmental writing and freshman English at an

open-admissions community college), I have worked with sentence imitation,

tied with comprehension.  I take sentences with some level of structural

complexity that I can be fairly sure my students will understand when we

read and discuss them.  I then model imitating the structure, not the

content; we do a few together; then, I have them write a few original

sentences which we read around the room.  At the end of that session, the

students feel they have done something important.



My underlying goal is to show them that, in fact, they know more grammar

than they think they do and that we are going to build on what they know.

As we discuss how any given structure works, I begin to introduce them to

the concepts of phrases, clauses, punctuation - all tied to the ways the

meaning gets conveyed.



Jack





________________________________________

From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar

To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface

at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select "Join or leave

the list"





Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/





To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface

at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select "Join or leave

the list"





Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/




ATOM RSS1 RSS2